Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_dslr_mirrorlesss_winners.thumb.jpg.9deb4a8db27e7485a7bb99d98667c94e.jpg

Recommended Posts

I think I could do with some advice on my use of wavelets (and the rest of my processing probably) in Registax 6 for Jupiter.

I either get a really soft image with little detail, or an ugly over-processed image to bring out more details. These are my latest 2 images from last night. I pre-process in PIPP and stack in Registax 6. You can see the un-waveleted TIFF version here. Can anyone get more out my image than I can because I'm stumped. Is there more to come out or is the original video not good enough?

(Image captured using Skymax-180 and DBK 21AU618.as, 60fps, Y800 raw.)

Thanks for your help.

Mark

Jupiter-2012-11-30-1500-6228-Raw.jpg

Jupiter6-1400-4601-60fps-raw.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's my attempt...(the original tiff has the right edge missing, maybe a bad download)

post-8551-0-40886100-1354276750_thumb.jp

I used linked wavelets 1 & 6 to about 1/3 - 1/2 way with 0.3 denoise on both then opened in photoshop along with the original and stacked with 60% opacity to get rid of noise and the over-processed look while keeping details. Slight boost in saturation brought out the definition in contrasting colours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The TIFF looks very noisy to me and I can't get much more out of it. I also see a stacking artefact on the right hand limb that I associate with the image getting too close to the edge of the frame. Perhaps going back to the stacking would be a better idea?

James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I used linked wavelets 1 & 6 to about 1/3 - 1/2 way with 0.3 denoise on both then opened in photoshop along with the original and stacked with 60% opacity to get rid of noise and the over-processed look while keeping details. Slight boost in saturation brought out the definition in contrasting colours.

Oooh, get him with his fancy shmancy opacity and saturation boost :)

Nice job though Stu.

James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks guys. Good job Stu.

The artefact is probably my fault (think I forgot to do a Do All in Registax before exporting).

Better version here.

James: I suppose the noise could be from the gain having to be fairly high to get the image bright enough in the 7" Mak.

Mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I use wavelets on planets / moon, I take a slice across the limb including the background. I then adjust the wavelets to give me a flat background right up to the limb, this is how it would look if there was no atmospheric bluring and as such gives a measurable way to apply wavelets. In your 'raw' file the background has been forced to zero so this info is missing.

any chance of posting the raw stack?

Derek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

James: I suppose the noise could be from the gain having to be fairly high to get the image bright enough in the 7" Mak.

I can't really say to be honest. I'm still using an SPC900. Aren't there supposed to be problems with the DxK21.618 cameras at 60fps though? Could be worth trying again at 30fps? I may be misremembering this. It would probably mean you could back off the gain a bit though.

James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, I'm also only using a 127 Mak. I may have no clue whatsoever :)

James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Derek: I can post the raw video- but it is obviously large. What do you mean raw stack? I think that's what I posted as a TIFF - unless you want it just stacked in Registax and remove the PIPP stage?

James: The DBK has 2 different problems depending on which firmware you have. The newer one gives a problem at 30fps (vertical lines) and the older at 60fps (bayer pattern). I have the newer one so 60fps is fine - at least I believe so!

Mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, that's more or less it... colour isn't showing up, but for demo it's fine.

Also it reveals your real problem.... collimation. You have a moon in the raw stack at it's showing comet tails.. which means you aren't collimated.

I'll have a play with the data

Derek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for noticing that Derek. I wondered if collimation was great. Will have to read up on collimating a Mak.

I haven't done much to it for a while. Only recently got the Mak out again having had poor results with it for a while.

Just never got round to trying to get it to work properly (only had it about 6 years!).

Mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is as good as I can do with the raw data you posted. either the data is faulty, or IRIS (which I'm using) can't make propper sense of the tiff. Regardless if you inspect this image you should see that the background is fairly flat, and in turn the planet and moon are fairly sharp. The remaining fuzzyness is from the collomation which is fixable, and I think the data conversion.. which we don't need to worry about here.

Derek

post-8988-0-21132700-1354286447_thumb.jp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Derek: Here's a raw, unstretched and un-debayerd stack if that's what you're after?

Cheers

Mark

The debayering needs to be done before stacking (or at the same time during stacking) or the colour information will be lost.

You have already posted the data Derek was looking for here: http://forthimage.co...ipp_unproc2.tif

Cheers,

Chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the artifact due to the area being processed? In Registax you need to be careful to have the correct surface area (image size) otherwise panels at either side of the rectangular format image will be ignored. I noticed this when I was processing some moon images. The middle square area of the image looked fine but two equal rectangles (to the full height of the image) at either side were left blurry when I started to apply wavelets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chris: I think you're right but the levels/histogram were a bit stretched.

WaveSoarer: Yes - the aretifact was just Registax - sorted now though.

M

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I noticed this when I was processing some moon images. The middle square area of the image looked fine but two equal rectangles (to the full height of the image) at either side were left blurry when I started to apply wavelets.

I thought this was the way it worked with wavelets on large images. Certainly when I'm stacking 2800x2800 pixel images of the moon wavelets only get applied to a small square so I can see what's going on. If I click on another part of the image then the wavelets get applied there. "Do All" applies them everywhere though, obviously.

James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The debayering needs to be done before stacking (or at the same time during stacking) or the colour information will be lost.

You have already posted the data Derek was looking for here: http://forthimage.co...ipp_unproc2.tif

Cheers,

Chris

Chris

The problem is, this data has already been manipulated:

if you look closely at the background you'll see it isn't flat, but it's dipped down close to the edge, a sign of oversharpening of one of the wavelets, possibly at the expense of a different wavelet.

here's a view of just the background

post-8988-0-56942800-1354290044_thumb.jp

Derek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chris

The problem is, this data has already been manipulated:

if you look closely at the background you'll see it isn't flat, but it's dipped down close to the edge, a sign of oversharpening of one of the wavelets, possibly at the expense of a different wavelet.

here's a view of just the background

post-8988-0-56942800-1354290044_thumb.jp

Derek

Yes that is true for the first TIFF Mark posted, but then he posted the correct version (followed by the 3rd, undebayered version). This correct version is the version I linked (I think...).

Chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok.. I've got the right data into IRIS

Only using wavelets and no noise reduction, but using the wavelets to set the background to as perfectly a flat plane as I can:

post-8988-0-70380500-1354292028_thumb.jp

Edited by rfdesigner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice process Derek.

Basically I just wanted to know if there was more detail in there that I wasn't getting out.

Think I've just got to get the collimation sorted (and corrector plate cleaned!) to get an initial sharper image.

Thanks guys.

Mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Derek

Wavelets are still fairly hit and miss for me. How do you go about setting the background to a flat plane?

Thanks

Geoff

Sent using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Geoff

I use IRIS for this, so you'll have to look at whatever you use to see what looks similar.

If you had a perfect telescope and no atmosphere, then when you image a planet the background glow would be even across your entire image, whether right next to the object you're imaging or at the edge of the frame. In your image it won't be, the background will be brighter next to the planet. You can use this to your advantage.

In IRIS I can draw a line on my image and it will return a graph showing the pixel by pixel intensity along this line. I use this feature to tell me how good or bad I've got the wavelets. What I'm aiming for is to get the graph to give me a flat bottom right up to the planet, then a nice abrupt rise onto the face of the planet

What I also do is to enlarge the image, then I can get my Wavelet tools to work on a finer scale and by attenuating the very finest scale I can reduce some of the noise that otherwise gets out of hand.

I've attached an example:

post-8988-0-34861500-1354543250_thumb.jp

I've alo found that the colour shows a little better with slight over sharpening. So you can do an accurate mono frame and a slightly over done colour one then combine them with an LRGB combine.

I just find it's nice to have some way of knowing how much wavelet to apply.

Derek

Edited by rfdesigner
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Piero
      I'm currently on my annual leave in Italy and the sky has been clear all day with no air turbulence.
      The telescope is out - of course - and I managed a session before dinner.
      I thought about sharing some photos taken with my phone and a couple of sketches.
       


       



       
       
       
    • By MarsG76
      Jupiter imaged on 17 August 2019 using a C8 SCT, Skyris 618C at f33.
    • By MarsG76
      Hello All,
      Sharing with you my best images of Jupiter and Saturn for this year.
      I haven't had the luck of a High Pressure system with no wind speed yet, but on the 17th it was as close as I had for planetary this Jupiter/Saturn season.
      Not my best images of the gas giants ever but ok IMO.
      I'm happy to see that the GRS seems to be repairing itself, last time I imaged Jupiter, the border around the GRS looked like it was breaking up so perhaps it'll be around long enough for my kids to see in the eyepiece.
      Captured at f33. Images consist of  the best 15% frames from 13x60sec @ 60fps for Jupiter and 13x120s @ 30fps for Saturn, derotated in WinJupos.
      Clear Skies,
      MG
       


    • By PH-R
      Hey all, I just started imaging the planets again after a long break. I have just purchased some new equipment a ZWO ASI224MC and skywatcher ADC (replacement for SPC900). I have read a lot about image quality depending on the height of the planets. The image shows top row images I took in Dec 2012 SPC900 ( looks like the world did not end 🙂 ) and bottom row July 2019 224MC. Would the difference I am seeing in quality be down to just position or am I not setting the new camera correctly? Thanks for any more image examples or help.

    • By PH-R
      Hey all, I cannot believe my luck. I was out on the 31st July practicing imaging Jupiter and Saturn with the my new ADC and ZWO Asi224MC. All of a sudden the ISS started to appear from the South West heading East. I quickly released the clutches on the mount and followed the ISS the best I could with the finder scope. Everything was set in sharp cap for the Jupiter capture, ROI was set to 320 x 240, 2x barlow plus ADC.  I could not believe it out of 6500 frames I manged to find 13 frames, which I stacked. Second bit of luck, PIPP said it could not find an object, so I turned the option off and it ran without errors. The hero was AutoStakkert which sorted the frames to the front of the ser file. 
      Composite of 3 images from my night:

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.